The Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench has refused bail to the kingpin in Rs. 1800 Cr fake scrap racket and Directorate of GST Intelligence (DGGI) seized Rs. 2.41 Cr Cash and uncovered fake Input Tax Credit (ITC) scam uncovered.
The bench of Justice Anand Sharma has observed that conduct of the accused-petitioner would in itself dis-entitle him from seeking relief of bail, as he has not only suppressed the facts regarding his antecedents, which are evidently having material bearing at the time of consideration of bail, but admittedly he has also made a serious attempt to flee away from the custody during pendency of the instant Bail Application by using his influence and power. Hence, the possibility of his absconding and influencing the witnesses can not be ruled out.
The officers of the Directorate General of GST intelligence (DGGI), while conducting investigation in relation to a firm, namely M/S Om Sai Traders and Suppliers, it was indicated that the Firm was engaged in trading of grains by showing exempted supply in monthly GST returns(GSTR–3B) as well as in GSTR – 2A.
By analysing the bank accounts, it was observed that transactions from different Firms mainly dealing in trade of scrap were shown in the accounts. Whereas many of such Firms were Suo motu cancelled by the GST department on account of being fake/non- existent Firms. Fictitious transactions were shown to have taken place from such fake/non-existent firms.
During the course of investigation, as many as 19 accounts were searched by DGGI, carrying huge transactions amounting to Rs. 1800 crores in the last 1–2 years and quite suspiciously there were cash transactions of around 800 crores.
While making further searches under Section 67 (2) of the CGST Act, 2017, it was found that one of such non-existent firms, namely M/S Suraj trading company, was also actively involved in such fake and sham transactions. While tracing the address of the search firm, it was formed that the address of one premises belonging to Shri Vivek Garg was given in the record.
When statements of Vivek Garg were recorded by DGGI, he informed that he had been working for Shri Rajesh Goyal and Ankit Bansal (petitioner). On getting relevant information, on 03.05.2024, DGGI also conducted a search at the premises of the accused-petitioner at Sonipat, Haryana, where so many incriminating documents were found. Even statements of the wife of the accused-petitioner were recorded, who also admitted that her husband was instrumental in creating fake GST firms.
During further searches conducted on 31.05.2024, huge uncounted cash amount to the tune of Rs.2,41,86,000/- was found and seized by DGGI and statements of Shri Rahul Tayal, Pankaj Dayal, Ankit Rao Joshi, Gagan Tayal, Gaurav Jain and Deepak Agarwal were recorded. Cumulative analysis of all such statements was that the accused-petitioner along with one other person was the kingpin of the Gang, who had created and operated various fake firms for the sole purpose of availing and passing on fraudulent ITC to their various clients and involved in rotation of cash through the monetary transactions, ultimately in order to avail fake Input Tax Credit.
The accused petitioner along with Shri Rajesh Goyal was involved in creation of at least 353 fake/non-existent firms with an intent to pass on fraudulent ITC and in such process, they issued fake invoices/bills without there being any actual supply of goods/ services. It has been pointed out that during such process fake ITC of hundreds of crores was passed on to various beneficiaries. DGGI also succeeded in unearthing that the accused-petitioner was instrumental in creating and managing fake firms by using identity proof/pan cards belonging to some other persons, who had no knowledge with regard to creation of such Firms.
The court held that where the amount involved runs into hundreds of crores and has serious implications over the economic fabric of the country, it cannot be said to be a routine matter; and hence, quantum is directly relevant in assessing the seriousness of the offence and the necessity of custody. Therefore, when determining bail in economic offences, the magnitude of the siphoned amount is not merely incidental but rather an integral indicator of the severity of the offence, potential influence over witnesses or the system, and the possible adverse impact on public confidence in financial integrity and the rule of law.
Case Details
Case Title: Ankit Bansal Versus Union Of India
Case No.: S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4836/2025
Date: 18.06.2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Swadeep Singh Hora
Counsel For Respondent: Kinshuk Jain, Senior Standing Counsel
Read More: GST Fraud of Rs. 23.48 Crore Unearthed by CGST Gautam Buddha Nagar; Scrap Trader Arrested
- Sameer Wankhede Bribery Probe –Bombay HC Frustrated At CBI’s Unending Procrastination And Repeated Adjournments – Extends Interim Protection In Plea To Quash FIR - July 11, 2025
- 13-Year Delay in Tax Appeal: ITAT Indore Accepts Commercial Pilot’s Plea, Orders Fresh Assessment - July 11, 2025
- COVID Limitation Relief Applies Even ITR Filing: Madhya Pradesh HC - July 11, 2025
